challenges

Homeless encampments line the streets. Buying a home — or even finding an affordable place to rent — is increasingly out of reach. Roads are riddled with potholes, tens of thousands of streetlights are out, and water and power bills are surging.

For many Angelenos, morale is poor and quality of life in the city is slipping.

This is the challenge for whoever becomes Los Angeles mayor — and it is one that has left some longtime political experts wondering how much one person can control in this vast city of 3.8 million.

“The expectations, given the powers that the mayor actually has, are probably too high,” said Tom Hogen-Esch, a professor of political science at Cal State Northridge. “You have all of these wicked problems that are difficult to solve in a perfect scenario, and [even more] in a governmental system as tangled and confused as L.A.”

The next mayor will have to deal with enduring problems of deteriorating infrastructure, police reform and budget woes. But there is also the unprecedented task of rebuilding Pacific Palisades after catastrophic firestorms and trying to help the city’s ailing film industry — all while preparing the city for the global spotlight of hosting the 2028 Olympics.

A recent UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies poll of likely L.A. voters, co-sponsored by The Times. found that the top priority for the next mayor to address was reducing the number of homeless encampments, followed by ensuring public safety and building more affordable housing. Protecting immigrant communities was the next most cited concern, followed by balancing the city budget.

After studying L.A. politics for more than three decades, Hogen-Esch said the city feels stuck.

“We’re talking about the same issues over and over and over … and a general underlying frustration with city government,” he said. “It’s almost like you could wake up 30 years later in a Rip Van Winkle dream, and you’re in the same spot.“

Homelessness

When Karen Bass launched her 2021 mayoral campaign, she proclaimed homelessness was her “overwhelming top priority.”

After nearly four years of her leadership, homelessness has gone up. This year, the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority announced that more than 45,194 people in the city were homeless — up from 41,980 homeless people in 2022 — an increase the agency attributed to external funding cuts and rising economic pressures.

After spending more than $391 million on Inside Safe, Bass’ flagship program to clean up homeless encampments and house homeless people, the city moved about 6,500 people into interim housing. But about 42% of the program’s participants have returned to homelessness.

Bass insists Inside Safe has made progress, clearing 140 encampments across the city. But the difference is not visible to many residents as more encampments continue to block city sidewalks.

Over the last four years, L.A. budgeted about $4 billion to address the homeless crisis — about $100,000 for every homeless person in the city, according to Lee Ohanian, a professor of economics at UCLA.

But the city has not spent all that money. L.A. underspent its homelessness budget by at least $473 million in the 2025-26 fiscal year, L.A. City Controller Kenneth Mejia said, because of its decentralized approach to homelessness, budget structure, staffing shortages and long approval delays for affordable housing.

Part of the challenge in addressing homelessness is that L.A. adopts a fragmented approach, sharing responsibility with the county and spreading programs among different nonprofits, said Fernando Guerra, founding director of the Center for the Study of Los Angeles at Loyola Marymount University. Unlike in New York, the L.A. mayor does not oversee the health department, mental health and drug recovery programs, and jails.

“The challenge for the mayor has always been that she or he is only given basically half of the arsenal to fight homelessness,” Guerra said.

Poor oversight is also a problem. Federal prosecutors have charged multiple nonprofit leaders with defrauding taxpayer funds meant to support the homeless. Last month, a nonprofit chief executive pleaded guilty to wire fraud and embezzling $23 million in homeless funds to pay for a $7-million Westwood home and vacation property in Greece.

But perhaps the biggest challenge is the staggering cost of building housing for homeless people in L.A.. Because of complex government financing, prevailing wage requirements, environmental rules, and the integration of medical and social services, a single unit in L.A. can cost as much as $600,000.

Housing affordability

Nearly 6 out of 10 renters in L.A. are cost-burdened, and polls show a majority of L.A. voters have considered leaving the city because housing is so expensive.

Bass has taken steps to accelerate the building of affordable housing. Her signature program, Executive Directive One, succeeded in cutting the time it takes to review 100% affordable projects and led to a flurry of development proposals. But after tenant advocates warned that rent-controlled apartments would be demolished and homeowners complained that density threatened historic neighborhoods, Bass restricted the locations eligible for the program.

Nearly four years after Bass took office, developers are not exactly seeing a building boom. Last month, the mayor’s office said more than 47,000 units of affordable housing are in the pipeline, but only 7,728 are under construction.

As with homelessness, the mayor has limited power to improve affordability.

A big test for the new mayor will be the state’s push to pass laws that spur more housing, such as state Senate Bill 79, designed to accelerate development around transportation hubs. With new buildings likely to face opposition in many parts of the city, Bass has opposed SB 79, arguing that it will erode local control.

Whoever the next mayor is, they will have to balance the need to build significantly more housing with homeowner opposition to new development, said Christian Grose, a professor of political science and public policy at USC.

“Voters probably are somewhere in the middle,” Grose said, “and there doesn’t seem to be a policy agenda that reaches those voters.”

Ailing infrastructure

When Chief Deputy City Controller Rick Cole retired from City Hall last year, he complained that “mind-numbing bureaucracy” had made the city ungovernable. Los Angeles was paying for city leaders’ decision long ago to organize the city to disperse authority, he said, citing deteriorating city infrastructure as a key example.

“Beneath the broken sidewalks,” Cole said, “is a broken system.”

More than 5,000 requests for sidewalk repairs are pending. Tens of thousands of streetlights are out. Last year, the city stopped repaving streets for eight months as officials struggled with staffing shortages to meet federal requirements to construct curb ramps for wheelchairs and new city rules that mandate bike, bus and pedestrian enhancements.

“The city can’t seem to manage the basics,” Bass’ challenger, City Councilwoman Nithya Raman, said when she announced her campaign in February.

Guerra said it was astounding that such a large city government — with a $14.8-billion budget and more than 5,500 public works employees — was so behind on fixing streetlights and resurfacing roads.

“How could that be?” Guerra said. “You cannot tell us that you need more people and more money to do this. What is happening?”

To speed up infrastructure repairs, some public officials are urging voters to pass Measure LA, which would require the city to develop a long-term capital infrastructure plan and distribute more power to the director of public works. Supporters say the measure would cut systemic bureaucracy and fragmentation. Critics, however, say it would lead to one person holding too much authority.

Balancing an unstable city budget

Last year, the City Council and mayor declared a fiscal state of emergency as they faced a $1-billion deficit due to revenue shortfalls as well as increased liabilities from the Palisades fire. Rating agencies, including S&P and Kroll, downgraded the city to a “negative” outlook.

Mejia cited ongoing revenue shortfalls, liability payouts and departmental overspending as the key reasons for the ballooning budget, which has grown by about 25% over the last four years.

The Bass administration has increased pay and benefits to thousands of city employees and police officers. It has also had to hand out record liability settlement payments due to LAPD excessive force claims and dangerous street and transport conditions.

Raman, a democratic socialist, has frequently voted against high city spending, opposing pay raises negotiated by Bass for Los Angeles Police Department officers and the $2.6-billion expansion of the Los Angeles Convention Center.

“She’s the one that says, ‘We cannot afford that. How are you going to pay for that?’ ” Guerra said of Raman. “It’s very, very strange that the socialist is the fiscal hawk.”

Police reform

Violent crime in L.A. has plummeted. Last month, Bass announced a 47% drop in homicides since she took office, and she has also touted a decline in property crime such as burglaries.

But police reform and police pay remain issues. While Raman has reversed her past stance on defunding the police, she has stated she would replace LAPD Chief Jim McDonnell, who she says has “lost the confidence” of Angelenos on the issue of immigration. The city, she says, needs a police chief who ensures officers do not cooperate with federal immigration officers. She has vowed to conduct an audit of the department to determine whehter there are gaps between Los Angeles’ “sanctuary city” policies and police practices.

Bass has publicly backed McDonnell, supporting his efforts to stem officer attrition and rebuild the department’s ranks. The department would be significantly disrupted, she has argued, if the chief is removed before the 2028 Olympic Games.

City Hall credibility

The new mayor will also face a challenge that is harder to qualify: making residents believe City Hall can fix Los Angeles’ many problems.

“I think we’re beyond pessimism in some places,” Hogen-Esch said, noting that for the first time in a quarter of a century he has spotted no mayoral campaign signs in his El Sereno neighborhood.

When it comes to homelessness, Angelenos would be happy to spend money if it actually solved the problem, said Jim Newton, a veteran journalist and editor of UCLA Blueprint magazine. Most want encampments gone for good, and not by locking people up or punishing them for being poor, but by genuinely helping them to be better.

“Is that possible?” he said. “I don’t know.”

Others say it will take new ideas and big swings that can be challenging in a city where the mayor has only limited powers.

“When they first took power, they were incredibly innovative and incredibly creative,” Guerra said. “Now they not only lack creativity and innovation in Los Angeles, but compared to other city governments, they’re laggard in implementing new ideas.”

For all their dominance, California Democrats will emerge from Tuesday’s election facing considerable challenges.

As polls show nearly 6 out of 10 Californians believe the state is going in the wrong direction and even more anticipate bad financial times ahead, the state’s new governor and legislators will have to confront some chronic problems, including a severe budget deficit, housing unaffordability, homelessness, and rising energy and insurance costs.

They will also have to grapple with difficult decisions on whether the state can provide Medi-Cal healthcare to low-income residents, how to make the state more resilient to climate change, and who pays for wildfire damage.

“There’s not going to be a long honeymoon period,” said Mark Baldassare, the survey director at the nonpartisan Public Policy Institute of California.

Californians are in a “pretty grumpy mood,” Baldassare said. Although their dissatisfaction is mostly hyperpartisan, with Democrats pointing the finger at President Trump and Congress as Republicans blame Gov. Gavin Newsom and Sacramento legislators, he said, a majority of Californians are worried about the state of the economy and want to see better government performance.

A construction worker on a new home under construction at the Taylor Morrison Avalon at Cypress.

(Bloomberg via Getty Images)

Affordability and housing

For voters, a key concern is unaffordability. More than half of Californians rank cost of living, inflation and the economy — along with housing cost and availability — as the most important issues facing California today.

The state has long suffered from a housing shortage, driven largely by local zoning restrictions, high construction costs and lengthy permitting bureaucracy. Newsom made housing a centerpiece of his 2018 gubernatorial campaign, initially pledging to build 3.5 million homes by 2025. He has largely fallen short of that goal.

Since Newsom took office in 2019, about 692,000 homes have been built across the state.

“I don’t know if anyone sees a new direction to go,” said Thad Kousser, a professor of political science at UC San Diego. California Democrats have passed a slew of laws designed to solve the housing crisis and spur home building, he said, but although they have helped at the margins, prices keep creeping up.

The median price of a California home has risen from about $570,000 in 2018 to $900,000 in 2026.

Even if California’s housing woes are partly a product of its successful economy, Kousser said, “that’s no solace for anyone trying to make the rent or have a place to live, so these will remain defining problems for the next governor.”

Before the governor can do anything, voters will decide whether to pass a series of consequential propositions on housing and taxes.

Proposition 1 would allow the state to borrow $11.25 billion for low-income and veteran housing, and Proposition 37 would allow the state to amass a $25-billion down payment assistance program for middle-class households. Proposition 45 would enable the state to overhaul the California Environmental Quality Act to speed up reviews for housing, roads and water projects — a proposal that leaves many torn between protecting the environment and wanting more affordable housing.

“There are going to be a series of difficult choices that Californians will have to make,” Baldassare said.

Budget woes

One of the governor’s first challenges out of the gate will be submitting a state budget in January to legislators.

This fiscal year, California has an estimated $18.5-billion operating deficit, according to the state’s nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office. By the end of the year, the office predicts the state’s “wall of debt” to balloon to about $29 billion — even as the state’s economy and revenue have grown.

Lee Ohanian, a professor of economics at UCLA, said the major issue California faces is that the state budget has expanded about 75% in the last eight years. This translates to a 40% increase when adjusted for inflation.

California’s budget growth is particularly alarming, Ohanian said, considering politicians have had limited success in addressing major challenges such as homelessness and had delayed maintenance of public road and water infrastructure.

“It would have been one thing if that 75% increase had fixed all those issues,” Ohanian said. “But the next governor and state Legislature are going to be faced with some of the same exigencies that we’ve had for a very long time and they may struggle to pay for those repairs and that deferred maintenance. The question is: Where is the money going to come from?”

In many cases, Ohanian said, California’s ballooning budget has not resulted in higher quality of public services. The state’s school budget per classroom is over $500,000 a year, he noted, well above the national average. But only about 38% of California students met or exceeded state standards in mathematics.

“The Democratic Party just needs to at some point have a come to-Jesus moment,” Ohanian said. “With the amount of money we’re spending, we can do better.”

Leisure Picon, 35, with her 3-year-old daughter, Ivanka Mendoza, for a doctor’s appointment in Lynwood

(Irfan Khan / Los Angeles Times)

Healthcare for the masses?

After pledging in 2018 to bring universal healthcare to California, Newsom set about expanding the state’s Medi-Cal program that began under his predecessor, Gov. Jerry Brown.

In 2024, California expanded Medi-Cal to cover all income-eligible adults, regardless of immigration status.

Spending on Medi-Cal now accounts for 40% of the state’s total spending and is expected to reach $219 billion this fiscal year — more than double what it was a decade ago. But as the state faces massive cuts in federal Medicaid funding, rising healthcare costs and budget shortfalls, it has begun to roll back that commitment.

Last year, Newsom and state legislators agreed to freeze new enrollment for Medi-Cal benefits for adult immigrants without legal status. Next year, many adults under 60 enrolled in the program will also face a $30 monthly premium.

Democrat Xavier Becerra, who polls predict will beat Republican Steve Hilton by a wide margin, has promised to protect Californians’ health by “cracking down on fraud” and “cutting waste.” Becerra has significant healthcare experience after serving as secretary of Health and Human Services under President Biden, but he has yet to provide specific policy details.

More or less taxes? And who pays?

As Californians become more concerned about affordability, Baldassare said, they are becoming increasingly fiscally conservative. Polls now show a majority of Californians now say that they’d rather pay lower taxes and have fewer services.

But at the same time, about 6 in 10 likely voters also say the wealthiest Californians should pay more taxes.

“There’s a more liberal orientation, but that doesn’t translate into people saying ‘I want to pay higher taxes and have more services,’” Baldassare said. “It just is ‘I want to have more services. I want to be sure that we’re going to have healthcare’… but looking to others to take that fiscal responsibility.”

The midterms offered Californians a chance to weigh in on who should pay. The measure that grabbed the most headlines was Proposition 40, the so-called billionaire tax that would authorize the state to impose a new one-time tax on residents with assets over $1 billion.

But Californians also got to vote on a string of other tax measures that could affect the state’s budget. Propositions 41 and 42 would constrain state government’s ability to raise potential taxes on assets in the future, and Proposition 43 would make it more difficult for special taxes to be increased by local governments.

Proposition 3 would make permanent a temporary tax increase enacted in 2012 on individuals who earn at least $371,000 a year to fund schools and healthcare. Kousser described the original 2012 tax increase as a game-changer that allowed the state to redistribute wealth from rich to poor regions.

“If that political deal falls apart,” he said, “the state will face much more strain.”

Embers blow down a street as the Palisades fire ravages a neighborhood amid high winds in the Pacific Palisades neighborhood.

(Ethan Swope / Associated Press)

Who pays for wildfires?

As California contends with ever more catastrophic wildfires, Democratic politicians have so far failed to agree on who should be financially liable when a fire is sparked by electrical equipment: Wildfire victims? Insurers? Utility company investors? Ratepayers?

Earlier this year, Newsom pushed a controversial plan to limit utility companies’ liability, arguing that holding them fully financially responsible would raise the state’s already high power bills and thwart utilities’ ability to modernize and meet state clean-energy mandates.

But Newsom’s deal would have shifted more of the cost to property insurers, risking the prospect of rising insurance premiums. After wildfire victims dubbed the plan a corporate bailout, Newsom abandoned most of it and tried to push a compromise that would help fire victims receive quicker compensation. That deal also fell through, however, when the Assembly declined to vote on it

Political experts agree it will be a tricky issue to resolve.

The utility companies are not popular, said Rob Stutzman, a GOP strategist. Yet to shore up utilities’ risk profile and prevent upward pressure on utility rates, he said, the state will probably have to grant some liability caps.

“We’re going to pay for it through utility rates, or insurance rates, or subsidies from the government,” Stutzman said. “Those are basically the three options — and none of those are going to be that pleasant for the governor or for the Legislature.”

Artificial intelligence

With momentum building for regulating AI, California is in a unique position as the hub of the technology boom.

Politicians in Sacramento face intense lobbying from major tech companies and venture capitalists as they seek to limit AI’s potential for disruption and misinformation without stifling an industry that’s fueling the state’s economic growth — and has provided a critical stream of tax revenue to the state.

But some political experts say the issue may not prove as thorny for California as issues like housing or wildfires.

Most voters oppose data centers in their areas and support AI safeguards. Even some AI pioneers are calling out for more regulation. In recent weeks, Anthropic and OpenAI have written open letters to Newsom urging stronger safety requirements.

“That creates an unparalleled political opportunity for a governor and the state to lead the nation in addressing the issues,” Kousser said.

October 29 was a good day for the post-Maduro optimists. María Corina Machado gave her first public address after coming back, in front of an enthusiastic student crowd in the private Andrés Bello Catholic University. Legacy TV network Venevisión broadcasted the event, where she didn’t rule out a meeting with Delcy Rodríguez, said a negotiation was the best shot for the regime and the nation moving forward, and spoke positively of the opposition-chavismo talks.

“We not only refrain from obstructing [the US-sponsored agenda], we are very interested in seeing it succeed and fulfil its mission.”

Becoming Venezuela’s stateswoman-in-waiting starts with building trust with actors with whom tensions have flared in recent years, but with whom she will likely have to work in the near future. 

Talks between the delegations led by Jorge Rodríguez and Dinorah Figuera have both lagged and half-delivered in some important areas. Yet, for Machado, the negotiations revolve around five crown jewels, a political ladder she must climb in the leadup to the next presidential vote, even if addressing each step is far from simple.

The first rung begins with what Rubio envisions as a robust Supreme Tribunal of Justice (TSJ). The nomination process began last week, and according to Rubio, appointments will bypass the Rodríguez-led National Assembly, running through the Judicial Nominations Committee.

A star-spangled TSJ?

The Supreme Court represents a big opportunity for Machado. The US is driving that train, a slower one than the oil and gas train, as economist Asdrúbal Oliveros has said. However, Henry Alviarez, her most senior party aide until she arrived on Sunday, has criticized the talks where TSJ reform is getting its initial shape. The day after Machado’s return, he called the ongoing negotiating table a “stool” that doesn’t listen to the people. 

As hard as it sounds, Machado can’t afford to snub a process whose first landmark was the decision to exclude her. Not because the other parties involved could try to mold the new institutions to her detriment, but because the US might try to build a train custom-made for its interests in Venezuela. The new judges could decide over important commercial deals where foreign powers participate, reverse decisions deemed unconstitutional, rule over key issues concerning transitional justice, among other subjects.

Machado must carefully coordinate her allies from other parties and exert influence over the restitution process if she hopes to secure her next objectives.

In Monday’s off-the-record statement, Secretary Rubio said he views the new Venezuelan Supreme Court as an anchor of the chavista regime, and made it sound like he wants the nascent one to be the backbone of the new republic. 

We don’t need to go too far to understand the practical implications. In neighboring Brazil, the Supreme Court is not shy to twist the arm of politicians, huge companies and fellow institutional actors alike—even in contentious ways, becoming a headache to the Trump administration and the Bolsonaros. Drawing from that example, and the likelihood that our republic won’t be perfect or perfectly balanced straight away, either Machado tries to influence some of these reforms and new appointments, or her future government could be shaped by conflict with a crop of powerful men in robes. Perhaps that sounds alien right now, but it’s the game in the inefficient democracies and hybrid regimes that abound.

Stairway to power

Next comes the National Electoral Council (CNE), which Rubio insists must be purely technical and “nonpolitical.” Here, too, Rubio claims the National Assembly will not participate at all. The State Department has hinted at dismantling the existing electronic voting infrastructure, though that detail was conspicuously absent from the official statement. Whether that State Department post was tied to domestic midterm political posturing—amid Trump’s warnings that he might not recognize results if opponents cheat “like in 2020”—remains an open question. What is clear is that both Machado and Trump share a deep aversion to electronic voting machines, and Machado’s team has been preparing proposals and expertise to help Washington shape a new system for Venezuela.

The restitution of political parties to their legitimate leadership represents a third, critical battleground. This is a common cause for thousands across the country, unless your name is Brito or Bernabé. Some of Machado’s most vital allies lead traditional opposition parties, and she will inevitably need their territorial machinery and clout when the time comes: Juan Pablo Guanipa in Zulia, Andrés Velásquez in Bolívar, Henry Ramos Allup wherever he may be, and so on. Machado must carefully coordinate these allies and exert influence over this process if she hopes to secure her next objectives. The restitution process is delicate because it could require the reshuffling of party leaderships, which could trigger factional unrest. Machado has refrained from committing her support to anyone, though some leaders have become closer to her organization than others.

Then comes the official registration of Vente Venezuela as a recognized political party. Machado’s electoral advisor suggests this could happen simultaneously with the previous step. For Delcy Rodríguez and the remnants of chavismo, the ideal scenario would be to sideline Vente Venezuela and rush regional, municipal, or legislative contests ahead of any presidential election. As Pedro Garmendia has noted, holding sub-national races first could dilute Machado’s momentum and boost the older, “mainstream” party apparatuses. Forcing a breakthrough here hinges on her maneuvering in the “party restitution” stage, ultimately requiring Machado to submit her party’s standing to the newly constituted TSJ and CNE—regardless of how imperfect those institutions prove to be.

While her Jorge Rodríguez jeered at the apellidos in public, these pragmatists found a shared dialect with the State.

The final and most contentious hurdle remains the lifting of Machado’s political ban. Unlocking her eligibility will likely demand recognizing Delcy and Jorge Rodríguez as legitimate interlocutors, whatever cognitive dissonance that pill carries. After all, one of them would inevitably hand her the presidential sash in the future, and nobody wants curses and insults inaugurating a new republic. It will require recognizing whoever the PSUV settles on as its candidate. Right now, Delcy looks like an uninspiring choice.

That is the five-step ladder Machado must navigate ahead of the next presidential election, whose actual date remains unknown regardless of what Rubio, Figuera, Axios, or La Divina Pastora seem to suggest. These hurdles represent her greatest challenges, especially since the electoral calendar is not hers to set.

Hovering over all of this is another crucial detail: Rubio’s statement (the most consequential since January 28) made no mention of parliamentary elections. If a presidential vote were to take place between 2027 and 2029, a hypothetical President Machado would face the immediate prospect of governing in direct confrontation with a chavista-dominated parliament within an intensely presidential system, or being forced into uncomfortable compromises. That is a bitter toad she may be watching with caution, one she may have to swallow to govern the country, or one that might compel her to reconsider her current trajectory.

“Business is business”

An effective domestic presence not only requires a positive influence on the Supreme Court and electoral board designations, but also mending ties with a key constituency that was punished (and at times manipulated) by chavismo: the Venezuelan private sector. 

When Machado emerged as the opposition’s undisputed frontrunner, the table was tilted clean: the CNE was an arm of the ruling elite, the Supreme Court was run by thugs or close friends of Cilia Flores, and Parliament was packed with loyalists. In the background, the opposition lost some of its staunchest economic allies as chavismo’s predatory omnipresence exhausted legacy companies and proud family businesses. Some fled abroad. Others opted for quiet, apolitical survival just to break even. A few big shots decided that surviving meant engaging, finding a receptive ear in a rising, ostensibly “more competent” Delcy Rodríguez. Assertions like “Delcy is no Maduro” or “I’d have Delcy over Diosdado” soon became common currency over rounds of Scotch in Caracas country clubs.

While her brother Jorge jeered at the apellidos in public, these pragmatists found a shared dialect with the State: peace, dialogue, cooperation and sanctions relief. If single-party China could pull off the miracle of Deng Xiaoping, they reasoned, so could an oil-rich Venezuela sitting right on America’s doorstep.

Machado must treat Delcy like a lame duck, engaging with the people that,  from outside the government, have helped her to run the country.

Nowadays, the relationship between some business leaders and acting president Delcy Rodríguez doesn’t look as central as it used to be. Sanctions are out of the way, or at least most of them. New investors and foreign companies are considering whether it’s time to come in. Maduro and Cilia are living in Brooklyn. Some of the things I find most refreshing are the groups of pundits, business figures and scholars speaking out over several subjects that were taboo before January 3—no elections and political uncertainty, lacking public services, poor policymaking in PDVSA and the central bank—the same subjects some important people learned not to discuss on the record.

That certain actors are already behaving like this, while retaining direct personal and/or financial stakes in the country, is an encouraging sign that incentives have shifted.

In this sense, Machado should recast her relationship with the Venezuelan private sector, even with those elements that have been associated with Delcy or Maduro before her. Some will be easier to navigate than others.

In my view, Machado must treat Delcy Rodríguez like a lame duck, engaging with the people that,  from outside the government, have helped her to run the country. Rodríguez has done so in the past few years not because she’s a genius technocrat, but because she reached an understanding with a series of actors that allow the country to operate amidst material struggle and daunting economic inefficiencies. 

We expect Machado to do a much better job than Delcy. She has a first-100-days plan, a program, and an experienced set of advisors that have spent years preparing to command energy, education and electoral reforms. Her children, who are having careers in some of the world’s most important technology and financial organizations, could also help her in private. Still, we know governance is more than world-class personnel and projects under your belt. The story of CAP 2 seems to teach that sometimes, not dealing with longstanding power players while pursuing groundbreaking reforms can outweigh having the brightest minds in your cabinet.

The example of 1958 also comes in handy. The private sector had had a beneficial relationship with the military dictatorship, yet backed Wolfgang Larrazábal when incentives shifted. Betancourt, with a radical and ideologically-charged background, learned to embrace them.

Venezuelan businesses face other steep challenges today, including the absence of a functioning banking system, a severe lack of investment, and restrictive labor laws. Delcy is already opening up the economy; Colombian capital, for instance, has secured access to profitable businesses. An avowed proponent of Friedman-style liberalism, a President Machado would also need to navigate the necessities of a dwarfed Venezuelan private sector with the urgent need for foreign investment and fresh competition.

For now, the opposition leader is back home, embracing friends, victims, students, and survivors. She is free to move and embrace almost whomever she pleases. The possibilities, at least on the surface, have never looked brighter than they do today.

ATLANTA — Keisha Lance Bottoms talks a lot about the policies she would pursue as Georgia governor. The Democratic nominee is less likely to talk about the history she would make by winning the job.

Never has a Black woman been elected governor in any state. The former Atlanta mayor and onetime White House adviser to Democratic President Biden is trying to do it in a Deep South state where her lineage extends back to antebellum enslavement.

“I am at least a fifth-generation Georgian,” Bottoms, 56, says as she campaigns. “I say ‘at least’ because we can only trace our family back five generations to a plantation in Crawfordville.”

Bottoms rarely if ever mentions slavery, Jim Crow segregation or even race explicitly. But that story — hers, Georgia’s and the nation’s — shadows her battle with Republican nominee Rick Jackson.

The billionaire, a 72-year-old white man who grew up in Atlanta but now lives on a sprawling suburban estate, has hammered the former mayor as a failure, painting her four-year tenure as a crime-ridden decline. Other Republicans, up to Donald Trump, have joined in, with the president accusing Bottoms of ruining a once-great city.

“It’s a long-standing playbook to paint Atlanta as this big bad place,” Bottoms said, dismissing the Republican frame as ridiculous for a town that once hosted the Olympics and recently staged eight World Cup soccer matches.

One of her most recent ads pushes back by featuring clips of the news conference she held with the city’s law enforcement leaders during the peak of 2020 street protests of police violence in Atlanta and nationwide against Black men. “If you care about this city, then go home,” she said. “We are better than this.”

Bottoms would have her chance to answer Trump and Republicans at a rally Wednesday headlined by Barack Obama, the first Black U.S. president.

Some Black women see the attacks as loaded

Republican coalitions in most states, and certainly in Georgia, are overwhelmingly white and anchored in suburbs, smaller cities and small towns. Those are places where many voters look skeptically, even scornfully, upon big cities and the people who run them. But some of the rhetoric directed against Bottoms is steeped in the specter of race and gender in a state where all 83 governors since 1776 have been white men.

Jackson’s TV ads, a deluge funded by more than $200 million of his own money, feature footage of the demonstrations and violence in Atlanta in 2020, along with grainy images of Bottoms. The protests followed the police killing of Rayshard Brooks, an unarmed Black man, by a white Atlanta police officer.

The Republican campaign effort has not gone unnoticed among some Bottoms supporters, especially other Black women.

“It’s easy for people to attack Atlanta and Mayor Bottoms based on their own biases,” said retired educator Beverly Rice, a Bottoms supporter.

Bottoms’ bid marks the third consecutive time that Georgia Democrats have nominated a Black woman for governor. Stacey Abrams lost in 2018 and 2022 to Republican Gov. Brian Kemp, who is leaving office in 2027 after eight years due to term limits. Abrams came as close to winning a governor’s race as any Black woman before her.

In an interview, Abrams was reluctant to assign race and gender as the deciding factor in her defeats. But she said Black women running for governor face a higher bar because there is no example yet for voters who place a special emphasis on executive experience. Abrams, also an Atlantan, had served previously as state House minority leader, a role Republicans minimized as insufficient experience.

Abrams said that executive standard “does not apply equally across candidates” in politics. She said Bottoms “has a sound argument” because she has held the executive’s role. Before that, Bottoms was a City Council member, magistrate judge and prosecutor. That resume, Abrams and others said, is why Republicans have so aggressively criticized Bottoms’ experience.

“Bad mayors don’t make good governors,” Jackson has said over and over in the closing stretch of the campaign.

He has taken special notice of her decision not to run for a second term as mayor, instead joining Biden’s White House as a senior adviser – a move Bottoms said she deliberately put off to finish her four-year term. In Jackson’s telling, Bottoms “turned her back on Atlanta.”

Republicans say Atlanta ‘burned’ in Bottoms’ tenure

Other conservatives have gone further than Jackson.

“Keisha Lance Bottoms let Atlanta burn,” top Jackson surrogate John King, a former Atlanta police officer and now state insurance commissioner, sometimes says at the candidate’s rallies.

That is a reference to protesters setting fire to a Wendy’s fast food restaurant close to where Brooks was killed. The reference carries an extra weight in a city whose symbol is a phoenix rising from the ashes — a symbol adopted because Union forces burned parts of a young Atlanta during the Civil War.

At a Trump rally last weekend in Macon, a smaller city in middle Georgia, the president hammered away, too. Bottoms “destroyed Atlanta with her crime and filth and constant riots,” Trump said, echoing the kind of sometimes profane attacks he has leveled against many places with large or majority Black populations.

“I always viewed Atlanta as a great city,” he insisted. “It’s not considered that anymore.”

In a 2017 dispute with then-U.S. Rep. John Lewis, Trump called the civil rights icon’s district, which includes Delta Airlines’ and Coca-Cola’s world headquarters and the Georgia Institute of Technology, “crime-infested” and said it was “falling apart.”

Bottoms counters with a more complicated reality

Atlanta did see a crime spike during Bottoms’ tenure, but it was not an outlier alongside the COVID-19 pandemic surge across the country, according to federal statistics. After the pandemic waned, U.S. and Atlanta crime rates dropped significantly. Bottoms did sign an executive order blocking the Atlanta jail from holding federal immigration detainees.

Republicans have exaggerated her action on bail. Bottoms signed a city ordinance that eliminated cash bail for certain nonviolent crimes, intending to reduce the jail’s population and what she and other city officials deemed excessive punishment for low-grade offenses.

Her latest advertising retort follows a surge of fundraising that she did not have throughout Jackson’s summer advertising onslaught. “When a national crisis poured into Atlanta, Keisha Lance Bottoms stood up,” a voice-over says.

Besides her exhortation for people to leave the streets, the mother of four said, “Above everything else, I am a mother, so you are not going to out-concern me and out-care about where we are.”

Her aides see the ad — and the reality of how she handled the matter in real time — as depicting a political figure who is tough and empathetic, aware of public safety concerns and the realities for Black Americans.

But Bottoms’ advisers, and the candidate herself, also say they want Georgians to make their decisions on tangible policy distinctions, most notably her emphasis on addressing economic struggles and expanding Medicaid insurance eligibility — a move that would reach urban and rural populations across racial lines.

That is the point of the governor’s office, said Rice, the retired educator.

“I have 100% faith that she can win if people just judge her with their values,” she said. “I don’t look at her and see a ‘Black governor.’ I see a governor for all the people.”

Barrow writes for the Associated Press.

NEW YORK — The reports erupt on social media every election year: Voters say they tapped a candidate’s name on a touchscreen voting machine, only for the wrong person to light up as their selection.

With some trial and error, and occasionally help from poll workers, the voters are generally able to cast their intended ballots. Nevertheless, some come away from the experience assuming the worst — that the anecdotal issues are proof of a partisan election-rigging scheme.

As early voting in November’s midterm elections gets underway in most states, with soaring turnout in many of them, the claims have returned in force, with voters — especially Democratic ones — in Kansas, Ohio, South Carolina, Tennessee and Texas documenting difficulties with the ballot marking devices.

Many voters have described their experiences on social media, with some falsely interpreting the troubles as attempts at election tampering to favor Republicans. The claims come as an AP-NORC poll shows many Democrats have lost trust in election results over the last four years, with many seeing the president interfering with the vote as a major concern.

Election officials say the touchscreen challenges are almost always the result of user error or an easily fixed screen miscalibration, and say the number of complaints this year isn’t higher than it has been in years past, despite the outsized attention on social media. They emphasize that voters can select a candidate as many times as needed, consult a poll worker for help and review selections before submitting their ballot.

Elections in the U.S. are decentralized, with thousands of election jurisdictions controlling the vote, each with different rules set by state and sometimes local governments. That structure makes the nation’s voting process extraordinarily complicated. It also shields it from widespread fraud.

“Almost all of the claims of vote flipping are understandable human error,” said David Becker, executive director of the Center for Election Innovation and Research, who noted disinformation purveyors often seize on well-meaning concerns to sow doubt in the voting process. “Is there one of us who hasn’t had a butt dial or mistyped something on our phones? It is not nefarious.”

Many voters, including Dolly Parton’s sister, report issues

The complaints about touchscreen machines switching votes have gathered tens of thousands of likes, shares and views on social media in recent days, popping up in various high-population areas across the country, including Tennessee’s Williamson and Davidson counties, homes to Franklin and Nashville.

Stella Parton, the sister of the late country singer Dolly Parton, wrote in a Facebook post on Wednesday that at her polling place near Nashville she had to “go back three times and correct my vote” because it kept defaulting to Republican Sen. Marsha Blackburn.

She added: “I’m putting this out here because when we vote, we take it seriously but we try not to hold up the long lines. Do it anyway. Don’t let them rig this election.”

Chad Gray, election administrator in Williamson County, said officials there had found no discrepancies in the voting equipment. If problems or questions do arise, he said, people from each party will examine the devices and make sure they are working properly.

Tennessee Elections Coordinator Mark Goins told WSMV in Nashville that the issues reported in his area were “not a vote-flipping situation.” “It’s more like an unintended touch that they may not even realize,” Goins said.

Another Facebook user explained in a video that when his mother-in-law attempted to vote for Democratic candidates in Kendall County, Texas, the machine kept selecting Republicans. He said she was ultimately able to vote as desired and contended that it could have been user error, but still concluded people were “jacking with our elections.”

Staci Decker, elections administrator in Kendall County, said “100% of the time” the issue can be attributed to a voter tapping the wrong part of the box onscreen or from voters tapping the screen too hard, causing it to become miscalibrated. She said her policy is for staff to recalibrate the screens every few days to ensure the accuracy of the touchscreen.

“This is part of an attempt at every election (especially the bigger ones) to scare voters away,” Decker said in an email. “Every single piece of equipment used in our election is tested before it can be used in an election.”

Reports of voting machine errors common during high-turnout elections

In South Carolina, where an X user said a machine made it hard for her to vote for Democratic Senate nominee Annie Andrews, state election officials haven’t seen any unusual increase in reports of voters having trouble making selections, said Sydni Bain, a spokesperson with the state’s election commission.

“We commonly receive some of these reports during elections, particularly statewide elections with high turnout,” she said. “We encourage all voters to be careful in making their selections and to review their ballot before it is cast.”

In Bexar County, Texas, where an X user reported having to tap the screen forcefully to get the machine to register her choice of Democrat James Talarico instead of Republican Ken Paxton for Senate, election officials said they couldn’t confirm any equipment issues.

“This could possibly be user error,” said John Moreno, the county’s assistant public information officer. “If a voter has concerns about their ballot, they should bring it to the attention of the on-site judge.”

Kristin Miles, president of the Texas Assn. of County Election Officials and election administrator in Bastrop County, said “vote-switching” claims come up every election cycle.

“Nearly every case comes back to the screen calibration on older touchscreen machines, not a change to anyone’s vote,” she said.

Officials emphasized that machines are tested before each election and that in most jurisdictions, there is a postelection audit that consists of a manual hand count of a sample of paper ballots.

Voting machine company explains what to do if you encounter problems

Voters across the country cast ballots in various ways, including with ballot marking devices that print a paper record or with paper ballots they fill out by hand.

The counties where most of the recent vote-flipping social media reports are concentrated use ExpressVote ballot marking devices from a company called Election Systems & Software. The machines let voters make their selections on a touchscreen. Then, a paper record is typically printed for review before the votes are tabulated.

Katina Granger, senior manager of public relations for the Nebraska-based ES&S, said the company works closely with election officials and provides technical support when needed but has not been made aware of any widespread issue with voting machines this cycle.

She said when a voter is having difficulty, they should ask a poll worker for assistance. If they’ve already printed a ballot that doesn’t reflect their intended selections, “they should notify a poll worker rather than cast it so the jurisdiction can follow its procedures for replacing the ballot.”

Swenson and Goldin write for the Associated Press. AP writers Anna Wilder in Austin, Texas, and video journalist Kristin M. Hall in Nashville contributed to this report.

Right-wing presidential candidate says he will release personal records if his opponent, President Lula, meets his conditions.

Brazilian right-wing presidential candidate Flavio Bolsonaro has set out steep conditions for disclosing his personal records in response to a challenge from President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, his opponent in Sunday’s election run-off.

Bolsonaro’s campaign has said it will release the data Lula requested if the president expands his own pledge to disclose his personal records to include those of his advisers, security staff and records from companies held by Lula’s children.

Lula said on Tuesday that he would share his bank, tax and telephone records, along with those of his family, if Bolsonaro would agree to do the same.

His campaign submitted conditional authorisation to Brazil’s electoral court to release the president’s personal data.

Camilo Santana, a senator and representative of Lula’s campaign, told journalists that ⁠⁠Lula has agreed to Bolsonaro’s new demands, and the president’s would file an official response with the court on Thursday morning.

Corruption scandal

The call from Lula on Tuesday came as both campaigns try to navigate the fallout of an explosive corruption scandal involving disgraced banker Daniel Vorcaro, which has implicated influential individuals and institutions across Brazil.

Bolsonaro, who narrowly leads Lula in the polls, is under investigation over alleged corruption and money laundering related to an investment he allegedly ⁠⁠sought from Vorcaro. He is also under investigation in a separate probe over alleged money laundering.

The presidential hopeful denies any wrongdoing.

Brazil’s president is also linked to a corruption scandal, via his son Fabio Luis Lula da Silva, a businessman, who is accused being investigated over allegations that he unlawfully helped another businessman to gain access to the government.

Lula’s eldest son is also being investigated over his links to a businessman detained under a pension fraud probe.

Lula’s son denies the allegations, and the president has said his ‌‌son ‌‌would be treated like any other citizen.

On October 16, King Mohammed VI of Morocco appointed a new government headed by Prime Minister Fatima Zohra Al Mansouri. This is the first time in Moroccan history that a woman is leading the government – a precedent that was covered widely in international media.

In the Moroccan context, however, what is important is that Al Mansouri hails from the Authenticity and Modernity Party (PAM), which won the most seats in parliamentary elections in September. The party was founded by Ali Himma, a close associate and adviser to the king.

PAM, which has formed a coalition with three other parties, dominates the new government. This signals continuity rather than potential for change.

A party aligned with the monarchy

When thinking about what trajectory the new government is likely to take, it is important to consider PAM’s evolution.

The party was established in 2008 with the aim of countering the rise of political Islam in Morocco and in particular, the Justice and Development Party (PJD). The Arab Spring, which saw mass protests across the country, brought changes to the Moroccan political scene, allowing more space for political forces like the PJD and, to an extent, curbing the influence of the establishment, known as the Makhzen.

In 2011, Himma distanced himself from PAM and became an adviser to the king. Yet, the party continued to be perceived by other political groups as tied to the Makhzen.

For years, PAM carried the stigma of its origins, but it persisted in trying to gain acceptance. In the 2016 elections, it challenged the PJD and secured the second-biggest number of votes, thus establishing itself as a legitimate political force. Yet this was still not enough to enable it to lead the government.

The party subsequently reinvented itself by rejuvenating its ranks and gaining experience in public affairs through its participation in the 2021 government as a coalition partner. In the latest elections, PAM finally won.

This election victory, however, needs to be put into perspective: 62 percent of eligible voters stayed away from the polls. On election day, the authorities had to call on people to go out and vote.

Apart from the low turnout, there were suspicions of irregularities, but because in some cases the official election records were not released, observers and political parties were unable to obtain tangible evidence.

There was also the familiar phenomenon of influential figures being brought into political parties at the last minute to boost electoral prospects. For example, just two months before the election, Faouzi Laaqjea, president of the Royal Moroccan Football Federation, whose popularity stems from the achievements of Moroccan football, officially joined PAM.

To secure a majority in parliament, the party has had to form a coalition with forces which had previously questioned its legitimacy. While PAM has gained legitimacy through this alliance, the other parties and their leaders may now lose credibility.

The newly formed government has retained more than half the members of its predecessor, not to mention the so-called sovereign ministries, which fall directly within the king’s reserved powers. Some Moroccans are already asking what was the point of holding elections if the same people are brought back to govern.

Challenges ahead

The new government has an ambitious programme to respond to growing domestic pressure as the cost-of-living crisis deepens. At the first Council of Ministers meeting chaired by the king on October 17 , a 2027 Finance Bill was put forward that featured greater emphasis on addressing social issues, citizens’ purchasing power and youth inclusion.

However, this agenda is facing an unfavourable international economic and financial environment, marked by rising energy prices and increasing costs of inputs for some of Morocco’s leading sectors, including phosphate production.

The state-owned OCP Group, which is in charge of phosphate extraction and the industrial processing of phosphate derivatives and is one of Morocco’s principal sources of wealth, is now experiencing difficult times.

There are also concerns about the potential effects of El Nino, which could bring more dry weather and threaten food security in a country that just endured seven consecutive years of drought.

Tourism, another major source of revenue, could also suffer from the global slowdown in travel, rising transport costs and the uncertainties arising from tensions in the Gulf and Europe.

The circumstances are therefore far from favourable for the new government, and public opinion appears broadly sceptical.

Last but not least, this government will face an experienced and outspoken opposition, represented by both the Islamist PJD and the radical left.

Even the ministers holding the so-called sovereign portfolios face serious challenges. The foreign minister must contend with public opposition to the normalisation of relations with Israel. The interior minister has to tackle allegations of electoral manipulation.

The minister of religious affairs is facing the fallout of controversial statements concerning Morocco as a secular country and remarks about Ceuta, known in Morocco as Sebta, made during a religious ceremony. These comments were poorly received by the Spanish authorities.

The new government has an ambitious agenda, indeed, but its tenure will be shaped by difficult circumstances – both at home and abroad – that are largely out of its control.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

California sued the Trump administration for the 100th time in under two years Thursday, challenging the practice of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents arresting people for civil immigration violations at or near state courthouses.

California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta said such arrests have long been barred because they are unconstitutional and deeply disruptive to the rule of law and the rights of victims, witnesses, defendants and other parties to court proceedings.

“We’ve seen serious criminal charges dropped and entire cases jeopardized because victims and witnesses are too scared to come to the courthouse to testify,” Bonta said. “Our justice system cannot function this way.”

Bonta said his office having to take the Trump administration to court 100 times in less than two years, often alongside other Democrat-led states, was a “sobering milestone” and a reflection not of political interference on California’s part — as the president and his supporters have cast it — but of Trump’s nearly unbridled lawlessness.

“It’s very troubling when the most powerful person on the planet and the president of our country is the one trampling over the Constitution, breaking the law so blatantly and brazenly, so consistently, so frequently,” Bonta said.

Independent legal experts said several factors have driven the wave of lawsuits.

Presidents of both parties have increasingly flexed their executive power, and state attorneys general have increasingly sued in response. During Trump’s first term in office, California — under the leadership of then-attorney general and current gubernatorial candidate Xavier Becerra — sued the Trump administration more than 120 times over four years. Texas Atty. Gen. Ken Paxton — now a Republican candidate for Senate — sued the Biden administration just over 100 times in four years.

Trump in this term quickly began implementing an array of policies leftover from his first term or outlined in the Project 2025 policy blueprint, many of which Bonta and other Democratic attorneys general were prepared to sue over, experts said.

Trump was also able to appoint a host of loyalists with the help of the Republican-controlled Congress, who helped advance policies that less loyal agency heads would have balked at, and which were sure to draw additional legal challenges, experts said.

Daniel Farber, a professor at UC Berkeley Law School and author of “Contested Ground: How to Understand the Limits on Presidential Power,” said California’s raft of lawsuits is a result of the current Trump administration “doing more aggressive things right off the starting block” — but also repeatedly targeting California specifically.

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment Thursday. However, it has consistently derided Bonta’s litigation against the administration as baseless and misguided.

When Bonta claimed in August that his lawsuits had saved California more than $200 billion, namely by reversing Trump cuts to federal funding meant for the state, White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson said Bonta should stop “filing frivolous lawsuits” and “focus on addressing problems in his own state.”

ICE, which also did not immediately respond to a request for comment, has defended its arrests near courthouses as a “common sense” approach to apprehending offenders at times and locations where authorities know they will be.

The 100th case

Bonta’s lawsuit argues that such arrests are arbitrary and capricious given the chilling effect they have on justice in the state. They violate the Immigration and Nationality Act as intended by Congress, and interfere with California’s rights under the 10th Amendment to execute its “core sovereign judicial and police functions,” Bonta’s office said.

His arguments echo those made by other state officials in the past. During Trump’s first term, for example, then-California Supreme Court Chief Justice Tani G. Cantil-Sakauye called the arrests “disruptive, shortsighted, and counterproductive.”

Arrests at or near courthouses began to rise again after Trump took office in January 2025. An ICE memo, issued in May 2025, said agents could conduct “civil immigration enforcement actions in or near courthouses when they have credible information that leads them to believe the targeted alien(s) is or will be present at a specific location.”

Incidents quickly began cropping up. In June 2025, ICE agents arrested two women outside a Los Angeles courthouse after a hearing in a local criminal case. The same unfolded across the state.

Alejandro Barraza, a criminal defense and immigration attorney, said he has witnessed the impact firsthand.

In October 2025, a client was arrested driving home from a hearing at the Riverside Hall of Justice. In December, another client was arrested leaving the Rancho Cucamonga courthouse. And a third client chose to plead guilty in his criminal case rather than go to jury trial, despite Barraza’s advice that the case was worth fighting, for fear of being arrested by ICE.

“The victims are losing. Our clients are losing their rights to due process. Everyone is losing,” Barraza said.

In June, U.S. District Judge P. Casey Pitts in San Francisco struck down ICE’s expanded courthouse arrest policies nationwide. Although the lawsuit focused on immigration courthouses, the ruling also covered state criminal courthouses, restoring earlier restrictions that barred civil immigration arrests in or near courthouses except in limited circumstances. The Trump administration is appealing the ruling.

Since then, California court officials have tracked arrests by federal agents and reported them to the Judicial Council of California. Thirty people were taken into custody in June, 29 in July, 19 in August and 14 in September.

State legislators have tried to push back. Last month, Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a law strengthening California’s protections against civil arrests for people traveling to, attending or leaving courthouses for lawful purposes. The measure extends those protections to public ways within 1,000 feet of court facilities, while preserving an exception for arrests made under a valid judicial warrant.

Bonta said his lawsuit is necessary despite the new California law, in part because the Trump administration thinks that “no state law applies to them,” and courts have in some cases agreed — including the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, which this week blocked a state law that would have required federal immigration agents to display identification while working in the state.

The wider legal battle

Bonta’s office has had substantial success in halting some of the Trump administration’s biggest policy moves — including its plans to end birthright citizenship for the U.S.-born children of immigrants, its worldwide tariffs, its deployment of National Guard troops in Los Angeles and other U.S. cities, and its withholding of billions of dollars in federal funding allocated to the state by Congress.

Michael McConnell, director of the Constitutional Law Center at Stanford Law School, said many of California’s lawsuits have been “legally meritorious,” as there is a “whole lot of legal error” coming out of the Trump administration — with a “lot of the overreach” having been “facilitated by the lack of internal checks” from loyal Trump agency heads.

However, he also said that as a California taxpayer, he doesn’t “appreciate having government using my tax dollars for what essentially are in many cases ideological lawsuits, even if meritorious,” because private litigants can and often do bring lawsuits of their own. He said he felt the same way about many of the lawsuits brought against the Biden administration by Republican states.

Bonta said he is proud of his team for challenging the Trump administration every time they believed it had broken the law and harmed California, despite Trump’s intentional effort to make that difficult.

“It was a shock and awe. It was flood the zone. It was trying to overwhelm with speed and volume, and we kept pace every time,” he said.

What happens next, he said, will depend on Trump. If he keeps breaking the law in ways that hurt the state or its residents, he’ll keep getting sued by California.

Fish was thrust into the action for his first minutes of the season against the Hornets after Dylan Lawlor went down clutching at his hamstring.

Wales international Lawlor had only just returned from his own injury, and was making his second start of the campaign before being forced off after 29 minutes.

Fish has been recovering from hernia surgery, and feels he has more to go before declaring himself fully fit, although he is in a much better place than he was.

“It’s never nice to get injured, especially as we came back for pre-season. In effect, I’ve not really had a pre-season. I’m almost playing catch-up at the minute,” he said.

“I feel like I’ve got a long way to go, but it was nice to get out there on Tuesday night and get some minutes into my legs.

“My injury, you can’t help that. It is what it is. I got over it, and I feel like I’m in a good place now, and I’m ready to help the team.”

Cardiff established a 5-0 lead with five minutes of Tuesday’s game remaining – only to concede a late Watford consolation shortly after.

“I was disappointed,” admitted Fish.

“At that stage in the game, of course, we could have done better. We were all hoping for the clean sheet, but it was nice to get three points.”

Cardiff are yet to keep a clean sheet since winning promotion back to the Championship and face a tough challenge when they head to second-place Middlesbrough on Saturday, October 17 (12:30 BST).

Like Cardiff, Kim Hellberg’s side rank among the best performers for shots on goal and touches in the opposition box.

After a trip to Teesside, the Bluebirds face further tests against Birmingham and relegated trio Wolves, West Ham and Burnley.

Fish is not looking too far ahead. Instead, he wants his side to lay down a marker by becoming the first away side to win at the Riverside this season.

“The games we have got coming up are tough. Every game of football that you play in this league is tough. We will just take it game by game,” he said.

“[Watford] was a good start, and hopefully we can pick up another win in Middlesbrough on Saturday.”